Opinion
Case No. 2:09-cv-599-FtM-99SPC.
October 8, 2010
ORDER
This matter comes before the Court on the Defendant, Philadelphia Indemnity Insurance Company's Objection and Appeal of the Magistrate's Order on Discovery Entered June 10, 2010, (Doc. # 59) filed on June 30, 2010, construed in part as a Motion for Clarification. On October 7, 2010, the District Court issued an Order (Doc. # 86) regarding the Defendant's Objection. In that Order, the District Court directed this Court to consider and clarify a portion of the Court's Order on the Motion to Compel (Doc. # 53).
In its Objection to this Court's Order (Doc. # 59), the Defendant moved the Court to clarify the following paragraph found on page five (5) of the undersigns Order. The paragraph reads in pertinent part:
The Defendant objects to the requests stating that the correspondence between the Defendants and whoever could be protected and/or confidential materials are irrelevant and overbroad. The requests are related to this claim file and are relevant to the instant claim and must be produced. However, the request are limited to the instant claim. Any information from the requested sources that is not related to this action is not relevant and does not have to be produced.
(Doc. # 53, p. 5). The Defendant states that it is uncertain as to what or which document request this paragraph applies.
Accordingly it is hereby
ORDERED:
The Defendant, Philadelphia Indemnity Insurance Company's Objection and Appeal of the Magistrate's Order on Discovery Entered June 10, 2010, (Doc. # 59), construed in part as a Motion for Clarification is GRANTED as to the Clarification. The paragraph in question applies to requests numbers 17, 35, 37, 38, 39, 46, 47, 48, and 50, but only as the requests pertain to the instant claim and claim file. The information is to be produced as specified in the District Court's Order
DONE AND ORDERED at Fort Myers, Florida, this 8th day of October, 2010.